Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aydinsalis/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Aydinsalis

Aydinsalis (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

07 April 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Kinda obvious, but see El C's talk page. RileyBugzYell at me | Edits 20:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Added two more, for the record. - LouisAragon (talk) 18:48, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

19 November 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


This user banned indefinetely in Azerbaijani Wikipedia over his rude comments towards admins. The user especially had offensive and sarcastic stance against me. The following users have similar writing style by making sarcastic comments about myself. As an admin in Azerbaijani wikipedia, I find this very suspicious. Could u please check the results. Azerifactory (talk) 10:17, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sro23:, the user Abutalub used same style sarcasm comment in one of the pages in Azerbaijani wikipedia, which awfully reminded me of sockmaster.--Azerifactory (talk) 00:09, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--Azerifactory (talk) 20:54, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

@Azerifactory:  Additional information needed. In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:

  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. Sro23 (talk) 02:41, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

29 November 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Aydinsalis (talk · contribs) has been banned in Azerbaijani Wikipedia for breach of the laws. Yet he is keep making new puppets here and using same technique and style by accusing other admins. Proof can be found under this topic "Aprel döyüşləri məqaləsində ermənilərin mənafeyinə uyğun saxtakarlıq" https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipediya:%C4%B0dar%C9%99%C3%A7il%C9%99r%C9%99_m%C3%BCraci%C9%99t. Furthermore, all the accused users recently created this accounts without posting anything in other sections but for some reason keep defending Aydinsalis.

Furthermore, all these users are defending him at here https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipediya:K%C9%99nd_meydan%C4%B1. Classic WP:Duck case.

Could u please confirm this. Azerifactory (talk) 22:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

I want to reiterate that Azerifactory did not answer the question. More convinced that, 'User:Azerifactory' these are shared account. Any user account should represent an individual and not a group. Haring an account – or the password to an account – with others is not permitted, and evidence of doing so will result in the user being required to stop the practice and change their password, or in sanctions (up to and including the account being blocked), depending on circumstances. (Wikipedia:Username policy#Shared accounts).Geograf22 (talk) 02:04, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Geograf22, I don't answer enquiries of socks.--Azerifactory (talk) 02:30, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Geograf22, it is very odd that I've never interacted with Geograf22, he didn't made any contributions before but suddenly appears here and accuses me of violation. Furthermore, he is defending previous sockpuppets. .--Azerifactory (talk)
Azerifactory, I also don't answer enquiries of socks. No one has seen you, no one knows you exist. You said that yourself. Is it true? Firstly proving you are not a sock. Geograf22 (talk) 15:47, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how someone being wrong about whether they unblocked someone is evidence for a shared account. Even if something questionable is going on there, the more likely explanation would be that Azerifactory is also using the Baskervill account. But unless both accounts are being misused here, that's none of our business, and you'll need to present evidence beyond simply being mistaken about unblocking someone. If you can't provide better evidence for there being a shared account you should refrain from making such accusations in the future although realisticly as I said elsewhere you seem to be asking for people to block you. Nil Einne (talk) 02:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nil Einne (talk · contribs), thank you. I'm not related to Baskervill at all, especially that accounts belongs to someone else, as well he's based in different country.--Azerifactory (talk) 02:59, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Nil Einne: I have never claimed it Azerifactory is also using the Baskervill account. @Nil Einne: I have read your questions carefully. They are logical questions. I've read this discussion. That was exactly the way I thought I could solve the problem. I used the link there, came here, opened an account and attended the discussion. Now I understand in the end, that's not my right. The violations I found, wrote about it. Everything I wrote is accurate. But I do not demand anything. I'm just interested in Azerifactory's answer. Why did Azerifactory write so? Why does not he answer this question? Why does he only write short sentences? Why does not he introduce his identity? These are additional facts. Geograf22 (talk) 05:07, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've misunderstood my point. I never said you claimed Azerifactory was using the Baskervill account. I said your accusation that Azerifactory is a shared account makes zero sense as the only evidence you're presented for this is that they said they had unblocked someone when it was Baskervill that did so. As I said, this was surely just a mistake, but if it was not a mistake it makes much more sense that Azerifactory and Baskervill are the same person. Frankly I don't understand why you think Azerifactory saying they unblocked someone when it was some other account that did so would indicate a shared account. Anyway as I see it,you have no apparent evidence that Azerifactory is a shared account. If you have no evidence, you should withdraw the accusation, since you yourself were complaining about insults but you've apparently accused someone of using a shared account with no actual evidence.

If you want to know why someone did something on some other wikipedia, you should ask on that wikipedia. It does not concern us unless it somehow relates to misbehaviour here. If you are blocked in that wikipedia, then you probably don't need to ask. Technically it's not explicitly wrong for you to ask here if you really feel the need, but you should do so in an appropriate place namely the editor's talk page. You've presented no reason why it should concern this SPI, other than the weird accusation it's evidence for a shared account. And if you've asked once and the person has made it clear they do not want to answer, then you need to leave it be.

Also what violations are talking about? I don't know the rules of az.wikipedia, but I doubt it's a violation of any policy to be mistaken about whether or not you unblocked someone. Also there is no requirement for someone to identify themselves when using the English wikipedia. Incidentally all these questions also seem irrelevant to this SPI.

Nil Einne (talk) 12:28, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Nil Einne: I thank you for your detailed answer. Appropriate place namely the editor's talk page, yes, I agree with you. It's also that. But this is not possible in the Azerbaijani Wikipedia. They block him. What can he do after that? There is no appeal, no arbitration. Whoever tells the sysop's mistake, they block him. Geograf22 (talk) 18:27, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What happens on that Wikipedia has NO RELEVANCE to THIS Wikipedia. Is that clear? --Tarage (talk) 19:20, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This is clear to me. But this page is devoted to the problems of another Wikipedia. Take this into account, please. Geograf22 (talk) 05:01, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What? No it isn't. It's not at all what this page is about. --Tarage (talk) 22:06, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that here are the problems of the Azerbaijani Wikipedia. Geograf22 (talk) 05:35, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

 Additional information needed: I posted a request on Azerifactory's talk page ([6]), explaining that we cannot process this SPI without diffs, and that we can deal only with sockpuppetry on the English Wikipedia. If no further details are forthcoming after two days, this already-stale SPI should be closed IMO. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 01:15, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: I'm going to close this SPI, without taking any action against the accused users, because the reporter has failed or declined to offer specific details, and because the problem appears to be one for the Azerbaijani Wikipedia people and not for us here on the English Wikipedia. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Aydinsalis/Archive&oldid=1076200574"